In May of 1954, a group of unknown musicians released a new record. I recall reading a review of it in an old magazine, and the reviewer was not impressed. It was, he said, one of the worst jazz records he had heard in quite some time. Only later would everyone realize that it was not a jazz record. It was called Rock Around the Clock by Bill Haley and his Comets, and is often considered to be one of the very first examples of a new musical genre that would become known as rock and roll. The point is, that sometimes the world changes in a fundamental way, and nobody really notices until later. In a way, the same thing happened upon the introduction of the second generation Ford Econoline.

The original 1961 Ford Econoline was one third of a brief wave of “forward control” vans built from the innards of a compact car. Along with the Chevy Corvan/Greenbriar (CC here) and the laggard Dodge A-100 (CC here), the Econoline provided the world of commerce with a compact and economical way to haul the most stuff in the smallest package. The thoroughly conventional Econoline immediately jumped to the head of that class, outselling its competitors by a wide margin.

But the first generation Econoline (which lasted from 1961 through 1967) was not a perfect vehicle. Its packaging involved placing the driver (and possibly a passenger) atop the front wheels, with a covered engine right between them. Unloaded, these vehicles were terribly front-heavy. Also, any kind of service was a royal pain, and involved removing the unwieldy engine cover and crawling over or around the front seats.

The 1960s was typical of many decades in American life in that it exemplified the attitude of “bigger is better.” So, when it was time to replace the original Econoline, was anyone surprised at the larger dimensions of the new version? Although the second generation Econoline was not that much longer, it was a fair amount wider. But the big news was that the era of forward control was over. Ford, the company that was so fond of better ideas, came up with a pretty good one: The front wheels and engine would move forward and the driver would move back.

And with the engine now at the front of the vehicle, a little teeny tiny hood (or an “outside service center”) was provided to permit some basic maintenance functions to be done without removing the pesky engine cover. Now, the driver of a van could check the oil, water and battery just like he did in every other common vehicle – from the outside. In the process, the boys at Ford set the template for the modern van, a template that remains firmly in place forty-five years later.

Actually, there is some debate about when this revolution started. The new Econoline was planned for introduction as a 1968 model. However, a strike at the vehicle’s assembly plant delayed the start of production until midyear 1968. At that point, although some units were built in the second half of 1968, Ford gave up on the ’68 model year and assigned the entire 1968-69 production run with VINs for 1969 models.

As if one was not enough, the redesigned van would bring a second paradigm shift: the second generation Econoline would no longer be passenger-car based. Instead, the new van would share most of its components with the Ford F series pickups, right down to Ford’s signature Twin I Beam suspension system. The vans would offer a choice of two sixes (the 240 and the 300) and for the first time, the 302 V8. With its two wheelbases (105.5 and 123.5 inches), the new Econoline would boast a 23% boost in cargo capacity compared to its 1967 Falcon-based counterpart. That higher cargo capacity could be shouldered by 200 and 300 versions to match the 3/4 ton and 1 ton versions of the F series. The ’69 Econoline would prove quite popular, selling over 98,000 units, plus another 32,000 Club Wagons.

These vans are etched pretty deeply into my memory. In high school, one of my best friends was Tom. Tom’s parents had two cars – a gold early 1970 Falcon sedan and a moss green ’69 base model Club Wagon. I spent a lot of time both riding in and driving both of them. When I say base model Club Wagon, I refer to one nearly as spartan as the car pictured here. Instead of carpet or even rubber mats, the van featured painted metal floors that were worn down to the shiny steel from constant shoe traffic. There were metal interior side panels that were probably as much to keep occupants from being cut on sharp metal pieces in the body as for any kind of decoration. The seats were black vinyl of a grade commonly found on forklifts and dump trucks. I do not believe that there was even a headliner behind the front seats. The thing was hot in the summer, cold in the winter, and noisy year round.

Tom’s family’s Club Wagon was also notable for something else – in the mid 70s, the little truck was approaching the 200,000 mile mark, a very unusual feat for a vehicle of that era. The 300 cid inline 6 was mated to a three speed column shifted transmission. Power was put to the road via eight lug wheels, which would indicate at least the 3/4 ton Econoline 200. The driving position was much like I imagined would be in a city bus – with upright seating and a nearly horizontal steering wheel.

Tom’s van spent its life in northeastern Indiana where snow, ice and road salt are facts of life. His van exhibited a kind of rust that I soon realized was a unique signature of these second generation Econolines: the little dots where body stresses pulled at the spot welds around the rear wheel arches. I have never seen another vehicle rust like this, but this affected every one of these that I ever saw. Even before the rust started, the smooth bodysides would soon be dimpled where the stresses of the vehicle pulled at the valiant little spot welds, as they heroically held their ground. At the time, both Tom and I were overjoyed when his parents splurged on a new ’76 Custom Club Wagon with a V8, an automatic and air conditioning. Color-keyed rubber mats on the floor, even. No sense in being extravagent. But deep down, I missed that rugged, spartan old van.

This particular van demonstrates the degree to which rust was a problem on these. These old Gen2 E-Lines may still rumble around in Oregon or Texas, but here in the midwest, I cannot tell you how long it has been since I have seen one of these in the wild (or anywhere else, for that matter). This van has been catching my eye by periodically sitting in a parking lot along a busy highway. After seeing this old bus off and on for months now, I finally found the time to get off the highway and find my way into the parking lot.

The owner is following the time-honored approach of enthusiastic van owners everywhere and for all time: Customize it! First, some cool wheels. From the looks of things, he has some hydraulics planned. But before he finishes this one, he has a lot of rusted metal to deal with on the lower third of the body. And what you do with those dimpled rear flanks is anybody’s guess. But although his taste differs from mine, I salute him. There are not many people gung ho enough to try to take a (hopelessly?) rusted out Gen2 Econoline and bring it back to its former glory. Particularly, since these never had any glory to begin with.

The Falcon-based Econolines have long had a retro-chic kind of respect. These, however, fell in some sort of crack between the campy early models and the more utilitarian later ones. Maybe this is the place where the fan club of these old buses can get started. Because they really were revolutionary, in a quiet sort of way.

I doubt that anyone realized what was happening when the first Gen2 Econolines started to hit the streets in the middle of 1968. However, the engineers at GM and Chrysler certainly did, at least once they got a look at the newest Ford truck. GM and Chrysler would soon follow the Econoline’s design playbook when their 1971 models were introduced. For a time, Dodge would take the sales lead with a more civilized version, until its 1970s quality woes caught up with it. And Ford would not stand still, for a third generation of the Econoline would be out for 1975, leapfrogging the competition again. The hood would be longer and the engine would be even farther forward, but this time the change was a natural evolution from the pattern set with the ’69 model.

The result would be that while the second generation would be the Ford van with the shortest production run of them all, it was also the one that set the pattern for how every domestic van would be packaged right up to the present day. The Mustang is everyone’s favorite example of the most influential car of the 1960s. But think about it: With the exception of the all-steel station wagon, is there really a more influential post WWII vehicle than the 1969 Econoline? This is certainly a question for debate. What is beyond debate, however, is that the world changed in a subtle but significant way when this van hit the streets. And we had no idea at the time.

I would love to learn more about the early Ford Transit. I understand that it influenced the American team that did the engineering on this one. Maybe one of our contributors with more knowledge of English/European Fords will find one and do a CC on it some time.

The basic configuration engine in front outside service hatch we are looking at a CA Bedford from 1954-1967. The transit replaced the Thames Trader 800 which was a forward control set up the Bedford kept its configuration intact for the new CF series of 68. Ford as usual invented NOTHING.

One of the things I remember growing up in early 1970’s Australia is that Ford Transit Vans were VERY popular. One of the things that I liked about them that I thought was really cool was that the drivers door could be optioned as a sliding door. All the delivery guys used to drive around town with the sliding door opened (probably most of them without seat belts). BTW, does anyone know about, or remember, Supervan? There is a mini documentary about it, and its descendents, on YouTube.

I see that logo and hear the first line of Neil Young’s “Tonight’s the Night,” about a workin’ man who “used to load that Econoline van.”

I can see the appeal of these buses but never wanted one. Gimme a Bronco or a Ramcharger – I’m just claustrophobic enough to want my V8 way out in front of me under a proper hood. I imagine Nissan had me in mind when they released this beast?

No question, Len. I get why the intended buyers like them, I was looking at it as something to goof around in. I do find the “conventional” Nissan vans intriguing, when the rest of the world makes them “COE.” My guess is that their pickups aren’t selling as well as they’d hoped, so this is a way to keep the plant humming.

Your band must have been doing damned good to buy a NEW van. I remember back to the Cleveland – Buffalo region bands I did photography for, and boy none of them had anything resembling new for transportation.

if econolines share their underpinnings with f150s, why don’t the cab on the pickups resemble the front of the van? if the hood was shortened, wouldn’t there be more room for a longer bed? i’ve noticed that in asia, small pickups with forward control style cabs dominate the market.

I can think of a couple of reasons–the ease of service of having the long hood out there on the pickup for engine access, and the separate cab and bed on a pickup allowing for different beds or different cab sizes (crew cab vs. standard cab, etc.). A van, being one box for cargo or passengers, would offer fewer possibilities for such flexibility.

For what it’s worth, the newest Econolines do more closely resemble the Ford Super Duty trucks, and the resemblance between the Nissan NV vans and the Titan pickup is even closer–but it’s the vans that have come to resemble the pickups, not the reverse.

But if you mean the stub-nosed models…depending on the make, you’d be surprised. I saw a police-pursuit video of a stolen Dodge van – 1990s vintage – being chased over city streets at about 60, or 100 kph. The van T-boned a Cadillac; actually had the rear axle lift off the pavement about ten feet; then settle back. The perp was well enough to try jumping out the rear doors – front ones were buckled shut – and had to be restrained on the pavement.

I don’t recommend that as a driving technique; but that’s survivability!

Partly conservatism, partly service access and weight distribution. For what it’s worth some users in the US, mostly railroads, did have Econoline chassis cabs with pickup beds or dropside flat beds to form a sort of forward control pickup.

I drove a Gen 2 Econoline a bit for a couple of years working for a hardware store. We didn’t consider the beast front heavy, just “light tailed”. The winter time ritual was to put about 1000 pounds of ballast in the back to give something resembling traction.

A trip on an icy side street had me do a 180 when I touched the brakes. Had to do it again to be sure… 🙂 Beyond that, I don’t recall it handling all that bad in summertime. Far better than the GMC that my folks had a decade later, though that was due to very soft springing in the front.

When I was a car jockey at the Ford dealer in 1970, just before I hit the road, I had access to any car on the storage lot, and day-dreamed a fair bit about snitching one for my getaway (how long before they noticed?). A shorty six-cylinder one just like this was going to be the one I took, for obvious reasons. California, here I come, with a big mattress in the back ….would an eighteen-year-old look conspicuous in a brand new Econoline without tags?

Thanks for putting this significant design into perspective. Every American van since is basically the same thing, except for the hood and engine sticking out a wee bit further. Ford was still focusing on short overall length with this first shot, and the ’71 Chevy and Didge vans showed that even a bit more hood makes a significant difference in cab comfort. The front seat passenger in the E-lines had a very cramped leg space, and odd seating position, thanks the the engine (and dog house) being significantly shifted off-center to the right.

The ’71 Chevy got it better; even the Dodge still was a bit too short up there, and suffers in that regard. But Ford saw the error of their way pretty quickly, in the re-designed Econoline for ’74 (I think).

1975 was the first model year of the 3rd Gen E-line. When my friend’s family bought their 76, these were still a novelty, and the 2nd gen was still everywhere. The 3rd gen, in addition to having much better foot room, was leagues ahead in refinement. The 3rd gen really did feel like a big car instead of a truck.

But these 2nd gen models had a nimble feel that the 3rd gen lacked. Is there a vehicle from that time period with a lower survival rate than these? I am not sure that there is, and I include Vegas.

I realize that NHTSA would not let Ford build these stubby Econolines today, but I always thought that the ’75 long-schnoz version went too far in the other direction. If I am going to have that much hood with my enclosed truck, I want one of these:

I agree with you from an aesthetics standpoint, but if you spent any significant time behind the wheel of these, 1975 and up Fords had much more driver and passenger footroom. Also, the passthrough area between the driver’s seat and the back area was much improved.
This reminds me of travel with a friend’s family in a 73 Dodge Royal Sportsman van. We would switch drivers while hurtling down the interstate at 75 mph. With the cruise on, exiting driver starts to slide to the right while entering driver holds the wheel from over exiting driver’s left shoulder. Then, exiting driver holds wheel while entering driver slides into the seat and buckles up. Don’t know how safe it was (actually, I kind of do) but it sure was efficient.

I bought one of these when I was in business. Very clean but it was a salvage title. It was an 86 with the extended rear and had a 300 six and a C6. At least it was supposed to. When the engine went I bought a rebuilt 300 and found that the original was a 240. The servicemen I hired had beat it like a rented mule.

I used that excuse to get out of my Datsun pickup with the contractors shell and into the van. Without ladders I always approached (but never hit) 20mpg on the highway. I lined the inside with insulation and plywood. It was pretty comfortable, kept up with traffic and very versatile.

I went to the junkyard and bought a seat out of a cutlass with seat belts and put that along the drivers side wall. Enough room to carry tools and a couple kids. Couldn’t ever get the wife to ride in it but #1 son and I were pretty happy.

A change of vocation to teaching and the 100 mile commute that went with it spelled the end for it. If I had it today it would sure make a good camper.

I remember Ford’s “A Better Idea” ad campaign from when I was a kid in the early 70s. They used a light bulb over somebody’s head in the ads. And Bill Cosby did some of the ads as well, about the same time as or right before he started doing the Jello Pudding ads.

My next-door neighbors had one of these (think it was a 1971) for family-hauling duty. The had a Datsun 510 at the same time (what a contrast).

I have fond memories of this van, too. As a kid, I delivered newspapers for the Independent-Journal (Marin County, Cal.). My manager was this guy named Hank O’Day. He had one of these that was repainted a sky blue (but was originally orange as the Independent-Journal newpaper trucks were orange inside and outside with big “IJ” logos; they went through a nasty strike in 1972-73 where all the orange trucks were vandalized – so the paper company repainted them in non-descript exterior colors. It was still orange inside).

Anyway, this Econoline (had to have been a ’68 purchase because the Cal. comm. plates ended in a “B”) had two seats up front and bare metal all the way back. Besides delivering us our papers for all our routes, Hank would load us all up in the van and drop us off in variious neighborhoods on subscription “start crews”. Canvass neighborhoods and try to get people to subscribe for the IJ (Independent Journal). Why, in the summer of 1973, that would cost you $2.50 a month!! (Monday through Saturday; no Sunday edition in those days). The floor of the Econoline was worn down to bare metal too. And yes, about 12-15 of us would sit on the floor of the van for the start crews and Hank would take us to Jack In The Box or A&W afterwards and treat us to burgers. I knew his was a V-8 from the sound of the idle and take off. Cruise-O-Matic.

Fun Times getting bounced along the floor of that van sliding around corners Charley Horsing the kid sitting next to you!

A&W in Marinwood, across the freeway from the Blue Roof Inn? I try to stop there whenever I’m passing through and need food. It’ll be a sad day when it finally goes away. It’s the last old-school A&W I know of.

Also, Pacific Telephone always had Econolines. That pea soup green color until the early ’70’s. Ditto for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E or as pundits called it, “Pacific Graft and Extortion). In the day, PG&E vehicles were all “turd brown.”

The same sort of revolution also happened in small pickups/vans common in Asia. They used to have a truly cabover design, with the driver’s legs hanging in front of the front wheels. But nowadays most of them has the front wheels moved forward toward the front edge of the car, the driver’s leg behind the wheel well.. But the engine remains below the driver’s seat.

Had two of these, at different times. First was a 1974 I got in 1988…a $300 runner when I was desperate for wheels. Although rusty and battered, it was a solid, reliable runner – and made me a van convert, for all the usefulness. A 300 and three-on-the-tree – taught me the joys of simplicity and lugging as a driving technique.

A few years later, better off, I went to Georgia in pursuit of a rust-free vehicle. Found a 1971 partly-customized Econoline…240 six, same three on the tree. Couldn’t wait to unload my money on that one; and aside from the throttle cable shearing before I got out of Atlanta; and one freak front-wheel lockup on light braking (never did that again) it made it home.

Alas…I entered the Navy with it, and immediately upon arrival in Cali, the three-speed quit. First and reverse were gone…not linkage, something deeper. Couldn’t store it in the military long-store lot, because the base commander forbade broken windshields and I’d taken a stone crossing the country.

I traded it in for a song; and not long thereafter I saw it around San Diego with a Mexican-looking gardener-type driving. Only time I ever saw one of my cars “after”…

My one brother went to art school out East (we’re from Ohio) and in the summer of 1978 two of his art school buddies were taking a road trip to Cali and stopped by to visit. At this time my brother was living at home, until he found a new place to live. The two friends (let’s just call them Cheech and Chong) arrived in a 69 or 70 Econoline outfitted with a couple of cots to be a makeshift overnight camper for the times they couldn’t stay with friends.

One evening while hanging out with the guys, one of them mentioned that the van was getting very poor mileage and power. So, I being the 15 year old motorhead at that time, decided to take a look at it. Neither one of the guys were even remotely mechanical, so when I reported that the air filter element was completely clogged, the PCV valve was shot, the plugs were nothing but nubs and it looked like the oil hadn’t been changed since Nixon was in office, they were non-plussed. Or maybe they were just hungover from the previous night’s indulgences…

So later that day, I did a quickie tune up (everything but points) on the six, and took Cheech and Chong for a demonstration ride, they were very impressed with my work. In return, I was gifted with some of the Central American smoking materials that they carried with them. Even 34 years later, it was quite the experience…

Later that summer I got a postcard from the guys, they reported that my efforts had increased their fuel mileage greatly, and hoped to stop by in Ohio on their way back East. It never came to pass, as for a number of reasons, they never left Cali and have been there ever since arriving.

Bryce is right- Ford were not the first to ditch forward control- the Bedford CAs were earlier. Mercedes also made vans with engine access from the front in the ’60s, they were designed to accommodate different crewcabs/flatbeds etc. Not sure what they were called- anyone know?

From looking at the diagram in the ad, it looks like the engine was off center. I wonder what that did to the handling , especially steering ? Consumer Reports rated the 71 VW bus and Econoline unacceptable because of lack of front crash protection. That was another reason the Ford was redesigned for 75 with a longer hood. I had a blue 80 Ford Econoline shorty with a 6 cyl. 3 speed stick shift with an overdrive. It was a delivery van that had been customized with a giant rear side window , carpeting, and a comfy bench seat that folded into a bed.

Back in the late 70’s I worked for an electrician as a helper and parts chaser. The van i was assigned was an old ’69 E100 short box with a 240 six cylinder and and automatic trans. I loved that truck. It was easy to drive, easy to park and had plenty of pep. This is not to say it didn’t have it’s problems. The shocks were shot and the roof would flex and pop in the wind. As for rust, it had the classic stain down the grill where the battery was rusting the underside of the hood and/or attacking the headlight connections on that side and of course it had the spots along the inner fender line.
Still I’ve driven a lot of different vans over the years; Ford, Chevy, Dodge, but without a doubt that old ’69 is still my favorite.